Discussion about the “P” Classification in CAR-RADS2.0: Plaque Burden Sub-Classification

Fan Zhang,Li Yang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2023.01.045
IF: 5.17
2023-01-01
Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
Abstract:We are very pleased to see the release of CAR-RADS version 2.0 1 Cury R.C. Leipsic J. Abbara S. et al. CAD-RADS 2.0 - 2022 coronary artery disease-reporting and data system: an expert consensus document of the society of cardiovascular computed tomography (SCCT), the American college of cardiology (ACC), the American college of radiology (ACR), and the north America society of cardiovascular imaging (NASCI). JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022; 15: 1974-2001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2022.07.002 Crossref Scopus (2) Google Scholar in which the plaque burden sub-classification was recommended by SCCT as a part of the diagnosis report for the first time. Indeed, the information about the qualitative and quantitative of plaque burden on CCTA has strong association with heart adverse events 2 Shaw L.J. Blankstein R. Bax J.J. et al. Society of cardiovascular computed tomography/north American society of cardiovascular imaging - expert consensus document on coronary CT imaging of atherosclerotic plaque. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2021; 15: 93-109https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2020.11.002 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (46) Google Scholar and can offer stronger prognostic value than merely the presence or absence of anatomical stenosis and clinical variables. 3 Mortensen M.B. Dzaye O. Steffensen F.H. et al. Impact of plaque burden versus stenosis on ischemic events in patients with coronary atherosclerosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 76: 2803-2813https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.10.021 Crossref PubMed Scopus (81) Google Scholar But, when we try to write a report with reference to the guideline, we meet a puzzle that “Visual" (observation) is obviously a vague concept, which will be resulting in phenomenon that for same plaque lesson the same doctor give different conclusion before and after and different doctors at the same time. And also, the concepts of “Visual” seems cannot cover the whole situation clinically (refer examples Fig. 1).
What problem does this paper attempt to address?